Remove duplication of string identifiers in Phase
#724
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Deprecate
Phase::namein favor ofPhase::idCurrently, there is a duplication of
Phase::name()andPhase::id(), where the former is supposed to be unique, whereas the latter is consistent with the phase id specified in the input file. In current Cantera, however, the context is always clear, so the differentiation is not needed.A differentiation of
nameandphase_iddoes make sense forSolutionobjects in the Python interface (and potentially serialization ofSolutionin C++). To preserve this capability, thenameis reassigned to the C++ objectSolution(see #696).Further:
Currently, phase name/id can be used when accessing species within a
Phase, i.e.The latter are, however, not used. I.e. per @speth's comment in #696
Changes proposed in this pull request:
Phase::namebyPhase::idin equilibrium calculations and thermo phasesSpeciesIndexin Cantera 2.5Pending
At this point, the only instance where
Phase::nameis still required is the Python interface (several tests checknamerather thanID). Once #696 is merged,namewill be part of the C++Solutionobject, i.e.Phase::name()can be deprecated.